Technological Options for Adaptation to Climate Change in Coastal Zones

Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc.

Technological Options for Adaptation to Climate Change in Coastal ZonesAuthor(s): Richard J. T. Klein, Robert J. Nicholls, Sachooda Ragoonaden, Michele Capobianco,James Aston and Earle N. BuckleySource: Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 17, No. 3 (Summer, 2001), pp. 531-543Published by: Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4300206 .

Accessed: 14/08/2013 11:49

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Journal of Coastal Research.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:49:29 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cerf

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4300206?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Journal of Coastal Research 17 3 531-543 West Palm Beach, Florida Summer 2001

Technological Options for Adaptation to Climate

Change in Coastal Zones Richard J.T. Kleint, Robert J. Nichollst, Sachooda Ragoonaden?, Michele Capobianco*, James Astontt, and Earle N. Buckley#t

tPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

P.O. Box 601203 14412 Potsdam, Germany

*R&D Division Tecnomare S.p.A. San Marco 3584 30124 Venezia, Italy

$Flood Hazard Research Centre

Middlesex University Queensway Enfield EN3 4SF, United

Kingdom

tt19 Murray Street North Ward Townsville, 4810, Australia

?Meteorological Services St. Paul Road Vacoas, Mauritius

#$NOAA Coastal Services Center

2234 South Hobson Avenue Charleston, SC 29405, U.S.A.

?? ?? r

ABSTRACT I

KLEIN, R.J.T.; NICHOLLS, R.J.; RAGOONADEN, S.; CAPOBIANCO, M.; ASTON, J., and BUCKLEY, E.N., 2001. Technological options for adaptation to climate change in coastal zones. Journal of Coastal Research, 17(3), 531-543. West Palm Beach (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208.

Many different technologies exist to adapt to natural coastal hazards. These technologies can also play an important part in reducing vulnerability to climate change in coastal zones. Technologies are available to develop information and awareness for adaptation in coastal zones, to plan and design adaptation strategies, to implement them, and to monitor and evaluate their performance. This paper briefly describes these four steps and provides important examples of technologies that can be employed to accomplish them. In addition, it identifies three trends in coastal adaptation and associated technology use: (i) a growing recognition of the benefits of "soft" protection and of the adaptation strategies retreat and accommodate, (ii) an increasing reliance on technologies to develop and manage information, and (iii) an enhanced awareness of the need for coastal adaptation to be appropriate for local natural and socio-economic conditions.

ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS: Protect, retreat, accommodate, sea-level rise, coastal zone management.

INTRODUCTION

The interface of land, sea and air features the most dynam- ic natural environments on Earth. A variety of coastal systems produce a large number of goods and services that are valuable to society. This diversity has attracted many people and major investments to coastal zones, even to places that are susceptible to hazards such as storm surges and coastal erosion. A large part of the global human population now lives in coastal areas: estimates range from 20.6 per cent within 30 km from the sea to 37 per cent in the nearest 100 km to the coast (COHEN et al., 1997; GOMMES et al., 1998). In addition, a considerable portion of global GDP is produced in coastal zones (TURNER et al., 1996). Many coastal locations exhibit a growth in population and GDP higher than their national averages (CARTER, 1988; WCC'93, 1994), as well as

significant urbanization (NICHOLLS, 1995). In many places, technology (defined in its broadest possible

sense as equipment, techniques, practical knowledge or skills for performing a particular activity) has been instrumental in reducing society's vulnerability to ever-present coastal

hazards. There are three basic strategies to reduce hazard vulnerability in coastal zones and for each of these, a range of technological options are available (IPCC CZMS, 1990; BIJLSMA et al., 1996). The three basic strategies, coined "protect", "retreat" and "accommodate", respectively, are:

* to reduce the risk of the event by decreasing its probability of occurrence;

* to reduce the risk of the event by limiting its potential effects;

* to increase society's ability to cope with the effects of the event.

Extensive research has shown that today's hazard potential for many coastal zones will increase because of climate change. Reducing coastal vulnerability to expected impacts of climate change requires following the same three strategies of protect, retreat and accommodate as for current coastal hazards, including application of the same technological options as are used today. However, the purpose and design of

existing technologies may have to be adjusted. "Adaptation" refers to the adjustment in natural or human

systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial op- 00073 received 5 June 2000; accepted in revision 1 January 2001.



532 Klein et al.

portunities. As such, reducing coastal vulnerability to natural hazards and climate change is a form of adaptation. This paper discusses the need for coastal societies to adapt to climate change and the importance of technological options for ad-

aptation1. The purpose of the paper is to show that coastal adaptation comprises more than merely increasing the design level of existing coastal protection structures. Instead, adaptation is a policy process that involves making decisions and applying technologies in a number of successive stages. The paper presents a conceptual framework for adaptation, outlining four iterative steps. Based on this framework, available technologies to assist in executing these four steps are presented.

CURRENT AND FUTURE ADAPTATION NEEDS IN COASTAL ZONES

In the 21st century and beyond, climate change is expected to have important impacts on coastal zones. The magnitude of these impacts and hence the need for adaptation will depend on a variety of factors, including the magnitude of climate change and the interaction of climate change with other stresses (BIJLSMA et al., 1996). This section discusses both these factors.

Potential Impacts of Climate Change on Coastal Zones

Many climate factors have relevance to the coast, most no- tably sea level and the frequency and intensity of extreme events such as cyclones and storm surges. Global sea levels are expected to rise in the order of 23 to 96 cm by 2100, with a mid-estimate of 55 cm, assuming the IS92a emissions sce- nario ("business as usual") without the cooling effect of aero- sols (WARRICK et al., 1996). Even if atmospheric greenhouse- gas concentrations are stabilized in the next few decades, a significant rise in global sea level would still occur, owing to the long lag between the temperature increase at the ocean surface and the warming of the deeper ocean (WIGLEY, 1995; RAPER et al., 1996).

Sea-level rise produces a range of impacts (TSYBAN et al., 1990), including:

* inundation and displacement of wetlands and lowlands; * erosion and degradation of shorelines and coral reefs; * increased coastal flooding during storms; * salinization of estuaries and freshwater aquifers.

BIJLSMA et al. (1996) concluded that most coastal areas are vulnerable to such impacts to some degree and some form of adaptation will be necessary. However, deltaic areas, small islands-especially coral atolls-and coastal wetlands appear particularly vulnerable to climate change. In addition, developed sandy shores could be vulnerable because of the large investment and significant sand resources required to maintain beaches and adjoining infrastructure as sea level rises. Taking a regional perspective, WATSON et al. (1998) and NICHOLLS et al. (1999) concluded that the threat of increased coastal flooding will be most severe for South and South-East Asia, Africa, the southern Mediterranean coasts, the Carib- bean and most islands in the Indian and Pacific Oceans.

Ongoing Developments in Coastal Zones

BIJLSMA et al. (1996) noted that climate-related change in coastal zones "represents potential additional stresses on systems that are already under intense and growing pressure". Climate change is one factor among many that affect coastal ecological systems and societies. Other factors that interact with climate change include overexploitation of resources, pollution, increasing nutrient fluxes, decreasing fresh-water availability, sediment starvation and urbanization (GOLD- BERG, 1994; VILES and SPENCER, 1995). These non-climate stresses decrease the resilience of coastal systems to cope with natural climate variability and anticipated climate change (NICHOLLS and BRANSON, 1998; KLEIN and NICH-

OLLS, 1999). BIJLSMA et al. (1996) concluded that "although the potential impacts of climate change by itself may not always be the largest threat to natural coastal systems, in con- junction with other stresses they can become a serious issue for coastal societies, particularly in those places where the resilience of natural coastal systems has been reduced."

Policies and practices that are unrelated to climate but which do increase a system's vulnerability to climate change are termed "maladaptation" (BURTON, 1996, 1997). Examples of maladaptation in coastal zones include investments in haz- ardous zones, inappropriate coastal protection schemes, sand or coral mining and coastal habitat conversions. A common cause of maladaptation is a lack of information on the potential external effects of proposed developments on other sectors, or a lack of consideration thereof. More proactive and integrated planning and management of coastal zones is widely suggested as an effective mechanism for strengthening sustainable development (e.g., CICIN-SAIN, 1993; CICIN- SAIN and KNECHT, 1998) and can be both environmentally sound and economically efficient (TOL et al., 1996). The need to consider adaptation to climate change within the framework of integrated coastal zone management was discussed by WCC'93 (1994), BIJLSMA et al. (1996) and EHLER et al. (1997), among others.

To identify the most appropriate coastal adaptation strategy, one must consider this full context in which impacts of climate change arise, and realize that the three earlier-men- tioned strategies-protect, retreat, accommodate-happen within a broader policy process, which includes consideration of the numerous non-climatic issues (HARVEY et al., 1999). Within this process, increasing resilience by reversing mal-

1 This paper is based on the chapter "Coastal Adaptation" of the Special Report on Methodological and Technological Issues in Tech- nology Transfer of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (KLEIN et al., 2000). In parallel with the preparation of the IPCC Special Report, the Secretariat of the United Nations Frame- work Convention on Climate Change produced a Technical Paper on coastal adaptation technologies (UNFCCC, 1999). Having a similar purpose, the UNFCCC Technical Paper has been based primarily on information provided directly by experts, while the IPCC chapter has relied predominantly on published, peer-reviewed literature. The fact that two important intergovernmental organizations in the field of climate change have assessed the potential for the use and transfer of coastal adaptation technologies illustrates the importance attached to this issue by the international climate change policy community.

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2001



Technology for Coastal Adaptation 533

adaptive trends could be an important option to reduce coastal vulnerability to climate variability and change. This approach will usually address more than climate issues alone and involve a change in adaptation strategy, for example, nourishing beaches instead of constructing seawalls, or intro- ducing a building setback instead of allowing construction next to the coast.

TRENDS IN COASTAL TECHNOLOGY USE

The emphasis of adaptation to coastal hazards has tradi- tionally been on protecting developed areas using hard structures. The skills and technologies required to plan, design and build these structures depend on their required scale and level of sophistication. At a small scale, local communities can use readily-available materials to build protective structures (MIMURA and NUNN, 1998). However, these communities often lack the information to know whether or not these structures are appropriate and whether or not their design stan- dards are acceptable. For larger-scale, more sophisticated structures technical advice is required, as well as a contract- ing firm to build the structure.

Until recently, it was rarely questioned whether a country's coastline could be protected effectively if optimal management conditions prevail. It has become clear, however, that even with massive amounts of external funding, coastlines in the developing world (particularly of archipelagic countries) cannot be effectively protected by hard structures. In addition, increasing awareness of unwanted effects of hard structures on erosion and sedimentation patterns has led to growing recognition of the benefits of "soft" protection (e.g., beach nourishment, wetland restoration and creation) and of the adaptation strategies retreat and accommodate (CAPOBIAN- co and STIVE, 1997; LEAFE et al., 1998). An increasing number of private companies in the industrialized world are now discovering market opportunities for implementing soft-protection options (DAVISON et al., 1992; HAMM et al., 1999). In- terest in the retreat and accommodate strategies is also growing among coastal managers, but these strategies requires a more integrated approach to coastal management than is currently present in many countries, so application is still less developed.

In spite of this trend to consider adaptation technologies other than hard protection, many structures are still being built without a full evaluation of the alternatives (VILES and SPENCER, 1995; CEC, 1999). A reason could be that hard structures are more tangible and hence appeal more strongly to the imagination of decision-makers and stakeholders and-by their visibility-may be perceived to provide more safety and hold the sea at bay forever. In addition, it is gen- erally felt that hard structures are less maintenance-inten- sive than soft structures. However, past experiences suggest that the design of soft structures is particularly important in determining the level of maintenance required, but that appropriate design and implementation often require good knowledge of coastal dynamics as well as effective coastal management institutions.

A second trend in coastal technology use is an increasing reliance on technologies to develop and manage information

(WRIGHT and BARTLETT, 1999). This trend stems from the recognition that designing an appropriate technology to protect, retreat or accommodate requires a considerable amount of data on a range of coastal parameters, as well as a good understanding of the uncertainties involved in the impacts to be addressed (CAPOBIANCO, 1999). National, regional and global monitoring networks are being set up to help to assess technology needs and opportunities. In the Caribbean, for example, developing GIS information bases has been presented as the first phase of a regional adaptation process and as such has been found eligible for funding from the Global Environ- ment Facility (the interim international entity entrusted with the operation of the financial mechanism of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change).

Third, many efforts are now initiated to enhance awareness of the need for appropriate coastal technologies, often as maladaptive practices are becoming apparent. For example, before a new hospital was built in Kiribati in 1992, a substantial site-selection document had been prepared, examin- ing numerous aspects of three alternative sites but without consideration of coastal processes. A serious shoreline erosion problem, advancing rapidly to within eight meters of the hospital, was discovered by 1995 (FORBES and HosoI, 1995). Op- tions to enhance awareness include national and international workshops and conferences, training programs, on-line courses and technical assistance and capacity-building as part of bilateral or multilateral projects. In view of the many sectoral interests in coastal zones, it will become increasingly important to involve decision-makers without direct respon- sibility for coastal issues and other stakeholders in this ongoing learning process (HUMPHREY and BURBRIDGE, 1999; KING, 1999).

THE PROCESS OF ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE

Since climate change was recognized as a problem in the late 1980s, the major focus has been on mitigation (i.e., reducing atmospheric greenhouse-gas emissions) rather than adaptation. However, interest in adaptation to climate change is growing as it is increasingly recognized that some climate change has become inevitable even with significant mitigation. Further, there can be important synergies between adaptation and management of existing problems (PARRY et al., 1998; PIELKE, 1998).

In an integrated coastal policy that aims to address both climate and non-climate issues, the potential for conflict between development objectives and adaptation needs should be minimized. In view of the fact that coastal zones are usually host to a number of, often competing, sectoral activities, coastal technologies to date have been designed primarily to satisfy sectoral needs. Given the additional challenge of climate change in coastal zones, the purpose and design of coastal technologies may have to be revisited. In order to do so, it is important that all stakeholders-governments, uni- versities and government-sponsored laboratories, the private sector, non-governmental organizations and local communities-are aware of the need to reduce coastal vulnerability to climate. In addition, successful coastal management requires




534 Klein et al.

Climate Climate - ___________ __ _--Miti-gation variability change

Information, Planning, Implemen- Monitoring, ImpactsAwareness Design tation Evaluation

Existing management

practices OCoastal Other Policy development

stresses criteria objectives Adaptation

Figure 1. Conceptual framework showing in the shaded area the iterative steps involved in coastal adaptation to climate variability and change (KLEIN et al., 1999).

that the planning, design and implementation of adaptation technologies be based on the best available information as well as on the regular monitoring and evaluation of their performance.

Accordingly, KLEIN et al. (1999) showed that coastal adaptation to climate change can be considered a multi-stage and iterative process, involving four basic steps:

* information development and awareness raising; * planning and design; * implementation; * monitoring and evaluation.

The process of coastal adaptation to climate change can be conceptualized as depicted in Figure 1. Climate variability and/or climate change-together with other stresses on the coastal environment brought about by existing management practices-produce actual or potential impacts. These impacts trigger efforts of mitigation to remove the cause of the impacts, or adaptation to modify the impacts. The process of adaptation is conditioned by policy criteria and coastal development objectives and interacts with existing management practices.

Figure 1 is a schematic framework, based on the long-term coastal management experiences in The Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Japan, with an emphasis on coastal protection. In each of these countries, management approaches have been adjusted over the past decades to reflect new insights and priorities, including concerns about climate variability and, more recently, climate change. It is important to note that Figure 1 represents an idealized decision framework, which does not capture the multitude of actors involved in decision-making, the uncertainty with which these actors are faced, the other interests they have, nor the institutional and political environments in which they operate.

In addition, in many countries faced with the impacts of climate variability and change, information, capacity or resources will not suffice to warrant large-scale investments in coastal adaptation. However, extensive discussions at the IPCC Workshop on Adaptation to Climate Variability and Change (Costa Rica, 29 March-1 April 1998) and the IPCC Expert Meeting on Small Island States (Malta, 19-22 July 1999) have revealed that also in these countries decisions

need to be and are being made, despite the constraints. It can thus be assumed that the framework shown in Figure 1 is also applicable in countries where coastal management is less developed.

It should be noted that adaptation in Figure 1 refers to planned adaptation, aimed at changing current management practices. Planned adaptation is the result of a deliberate policy decision, based on an awareness that climate conditions have changed or are about to change and that action is required to return to or maintain a desired state. Autonomous adaptation, which does not constitute a conscious response to climatic stimuli but is triggered by ecological changes in natural systems and by market or welfare changes in human systems, is implied in Figure 1 as it determines the manifes- tation of impacts (KLEIN et al., 1999).

COASTAL ADAPTATION TECHNOLOGIES

This section provides important examples of technologies that can be employed to accomplish each of the four steps shown in Figure 1, and provides some contextual information on their application. It should be noted that no attempt has been made to provide all-inclusive lists of technologies. Rath- er, the technologies and references listed in this section are meant to be illustrative and to encourage the reader to consider as wide a spectrum of adaptation technologies as possible.

An important issue that is often overlooked in adaptation assessment is that adaptation strategies involve more than just technological options (CAPOBIANCO, 1999). Technological options only can be implemented effectively in an appropriate economic, institutional, legal and socio-cultural context (KLEIN and TOL, 1997). Thus, a successful adaptation strategy will comprise a mix of various adaptation approaches, tailored to the particular needs of the area at risk and aimed at reducing implementation constraints (BIJLSMA et al., 1996).

Information Development and Awareness Raising

Data collection and information development are essential prerequisites for coastal adaptation, particularly to identify adaptation needs and priorities. The more relevant, accurate





Table 1. Selected technologies that can be used to better understand coastal systems.

Application Technology Additional Information

Coastal System Description * Coastal topography and bathymetry - Mapping and surveying - BIRKEMEIER et al. (1985, 1999); STAUBLE and GROSSKOPF

(1993) - Videography - DEBUSSCHERE et al. (1991); HOLMAN et al. (1994); PLANT and

HOLMAN (1997) - Airborne laserscanning (lidar) - LILLYCROP and ESTEP (1995); SALLENGER et al. (1999) - Satellite remote sensing - LEU et al. (1999)

* Wind and wave regime - Waverider buoys - MORANG et al. (1997a) - Satellite remote sensing - MARTINEZ-DIAz-DE-LEON et al. (1999)

* Tidal and surge regime - Tide gauges - PUGH (1987); ZHANG et al. (1997) * Relative sea level - Tide gauges - EMERY and AUBREY (1991); WOODWORTH (1991); GROGER

and PLAG (1993); NICHOLLS and LEATHERMAN (1996); NOAA (1998)

- Historical and geological methods - VAN DE PLASSCHE (1986) * Absolute sea level - Satellite remote sensing - NEREM (1995); FU et al. (1996); NEREM et al. (1997); CAZEN-

AVE et al. (1998) - Tide gauges, satellite altimetry and - DOUGLAS (1991); BAKER (1993); MILLER et al. (1993); ZERBINI

global positioning systems et al. (1996); NEILAN et al. (1997) * Past shoreline positions - Historical and geological methods - CROWELL et al. (1991); BEETS et al. (1992); CROWELL et al.

(1993); MOORE (2000) * Land use - Airborne and satellite remote sensing - REDFERN and WILLIAMS (1996); CLARK et al. (1997); HENDER-

SON et al. (1999) * Natural values - Resource surveys - LIPTON and WELLMAN (1995); TURNER and ADGER (1996) * Socio-economic aspects - Mapping and surveying - PENNING-ROSWELL et al. (1992) * Legal and institutional arrangements - Interviews, questionnaires - ENGLISH NATURE (1993) * Socio-cultural factors - Interviews, questionnaires - TUNSTALL and PENNING-ROSWELL (1998); TUNSTALL (2000)

Climate Impact Assessment * Index-based methods - Coastal vulnerability index - HUGHES and BRUNDRIT (1992); GORNITZ et al. (1994); SHAW

et al. (1998) - Sustainable capacity index - KAY and HAY (1993); YAMADA et al. (1995); NUNN et al.

(1994a,b) * (Semi-) quantitative methods - IPCC common methodology - IPCC CZMS (1992); BIJLSMA et al. (1996)

- Aerial-videotape assisted vulnerability - LEATHERMAN et al. (1995); NICHOLLS and LEATHERMAN assessment (1995)

- UNEP impact and adaptation assess- - KLEIN and NICHOLLS (1998, 1999) ment

* Integrated assessment - Coupled models - ENGELEN et al. (1993); RUTH and PIEPER (1994); WEST and DOWLATABADI (1999)

Awareness Raising * Printed information - Brochures, leaflets, newsletters * Audio-visual media - Newspapers, radio, television, cinema * Interactive tools - Board-games

- Internet, worldwide web - Computerized simulation models

and up-to-date the data and information available to the coastal manager, the more targeted and effective adaptation strategies can be. Coastal adaptation requires data and information on coastal characteristics and dynamics, patterns of human behavior as well as an understanding of the potential consequences of climate change. It is also essential that there is a general awareness among the public, coastal man-

agers and decision-makers of these consequences and the need to take appropriate action (KLEIN et al., 1999).

Large-scale global and regional data repositories have been established for a great number of climatic and socio-economic variables relevant to coastal zones. These sources of data may be accessed, displayed and downloaded from the Internet. Sea-level data, for example, may be obtained from the Per- manent Service for Mean Sea Level (www.nbi.ac.uk/psmsl/ index.html), the Global Sea Level Observing System (www.

pol.ac.uk/psmsl/programmes/gloss.info.html) and the Univer-

sity of Hawai'i Sea Level Center (uhslc.soest.hawaii.edu). Ad- ditional global data sets can be accessed via the IRI/LDEO Climate Data Library (ingrid.ldeo.columbia.edu), the ICSU World Data Center (www.wdc.rl.ac.uk/wdcmain/), IGBP- LOICZ (www.nioz.nl/loicz/), the Center for International Earth Science Information Network (www.ciesin.org) and the IPCC Data Distribution Centre (ipcc-ddc.cru.uea.ac.uk). The latter center also provides climatic and socio-economic scenarios.

Useful as they may be, coastal adaptation to climate

change will require more detailed information than these

readily-available data sets can provide. Table 1 lists a number of relevant technologies that can serve to increase the

understanding of the coastal system (which involves data collection and analysis), to conduct climate impact assessment




536 Klein et al.

in coastal zones (so that the severity of potential impacts can be quantified for given scenarios), and to raise public awareness (that some form of adaptation is necessary). Where appropriate, reference is made to publications that either de- scribe the technology in detail or provide examples of its application. Further information on a broad range of technologies for coastal system description can be found in MORANG et al. (1997a), LARSON et al. (1997), MORANG et al. (1997b) and GORMAN et al. (1998). CAPOBIANCO (1999) discussed technologies in relation to integrated coastal zone management.

Planning and Design

When the available data and information point toward a potential problem that would justify taking action, the next stage is to decide which action could best be taken and where and when this could best be implemented. The answers to these questions depend on the prevailing criteria that guide local, national or regional policy preparation, as well as on existing coastal development and management plans that form the broader context for any adaptation initiative. Im- portant policy criteria that could influence adaptation decisions include cost-effectiveness, environmental sustainability, cultural compatibility and social acceptability. In addition, countries may choose to take a precautionary approach when postponing action would involve substantial risks, even though uncertainty may still be considerable (CEC, 1999).

Coastal planners always will face a certain degree of uncertainty, not only because the future is by definition uncertain, but also because knowledge of natural and socio-economic coastal processes is and always will remain incom- plete. This uncertainty requires planners to assess the environmental and societal risks of climate change with and without adaptation (CARTER et al., 1994). The information thus obtained can help to determine the optimal adaptation strategy (which action?) and timing of implementation (when?) (e.g., CHAO and HOBBS, 1997; YOHE and NEUMANN, 1997). There are a number of decision tools available to assist in this process. Examples of these tools include cost-benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, risk-effectiveness analysis and multi-criteria analysis (TURNER and ADGER, 1996). The latter technique is particularly relevant when great sig- nificance is attached to values that cannot be easily ex- pressed in monetary terms.

Geographical information systems (GIS) are an important technology for spatial planning. GIS combines computer mapping and visualization techniques with spatial databases and statistical, modeling and analytical tools. It offers powerful methods to collect, manage, retrieve, integrate, manipulate, combine, visualize and analyze spatial data and to derive information from these data (BURROUGH and MCDONNELL,

1998; LONGLEY et al., 1999; WRIGHT and BARTLETT, 1999). One simple, first-order application of GIS in coastal adaptation would be overlaying scenarios of sea-level rise with ele- vation and coastal development data to define impact zones. More sophisticated applications may include the modeling of morphodynamic and ecological responses to climate change (e.g., CAPOBIANCO et al., 1999). GIS technology and its appli-

cation are evolving rapidly, and GIS can provide excellent support to coastal managers for making decisions about adaptation.

It is important to note that GIS is an example of a technology that can contribute to each of the four adaptation steps. Collected data can be stored in a GIS, combined to develop new insights and information, and visualized for interpretation and educational purposes. In combination with scenarios of relevant developments and models to assess and evaluate changes in important natural and socio-economic variables, GIS can assist planners to identify appropriate adaptation technologies as well as their optimal locations for implementation, depending on the criteria of the decision- maker. It allows for the non-invasive, reversible and refinable testing of specific adaptation technologies before these are implemented in the real world. After implementation, newly acquired data can be analyzed to evaluate technology performance. Once created, a GIS database will have further utility in other aspects of coastal management (O'REGAN, 1996; WRIGHT and BARTLETT, 1999).

The modeling of potential futures based on plausible scenarios is particularly pertinent for the planning and design of adaptation technologies, when relevant impacts are quantified, alternative adaptation options are evaluated, and one course of action is selected. Coastal management and climate impact assessment require models of relevant changes in morphological, ecological and human factors, as well as their interaction over appropriate time scales (i.e., a decade or longer) (CAPOBIANCO et al., 1999). The necessary modeling ca- pabilities are increasing rapidly, including morphological models (e.g., DE VRIEND et al., 1993; DE VRIEND, 1998; CA-

POBIANCO et al., 1998), ecological and landscape models (see CAPOBIANCO et al., 1999), model frameworks designed for management purposes (e.g., PONTEE and TOWNEND, 1999), and integrated models that explicitly include the human system (e.g., ENGELEN et al., 1993). The rapid developments in information technology are facilitating the rapid transfer and application of these tools as they are developed. However, the limitations inherent in all models (i.e., they are representa- tions of a part of reality for a specific purpose) must not be overlooked. Human expertise and interpretation remain essential for the intelligent use of any model.

The quality and effectiveness of the planning and design process is affected by the context in which the decision is made. Coastal management in many countries used to be top- down by nature, but as public interest and involvement in coastal issues has grown so has resistance to top-down decision-making (e.g., TAIEPA et al., 1997). The successful implementation of many coastal policies, including adaptation to climate change, is now increasingly dependent on public acceptance at the community level (KING, 1999). Hence, in addition to informing the public so as to raise their awareness of the issues at stake (see above), it is also important to involve them throughout the planning process (CEC, 1999). Gaining public acceptance, for example by two-way interaction and partnerships, is an important prerequisite for iden- tifying and transferring appropriate adaptation technologies. Further, local expertise will be required for successful tech-





Table 2. Options and technologies for coastal adaptation.

Application Technology Additional Information

Protect

* Hard structural options - Dikes, levees, floodwalls - Seawalls, revetments, bulkheads - PILARCZYK (1990); SILVESTER and Hsu (1993) - Groynes - Detached breakwaters - Floodgates and tidal barriers - GILBERT and HORNER (1984); KELLY (1991); PENNING-

ROWSELL et al. (1998) - Saltwater intrusion barriers - SORENSEN et al. (1984)

* Soft structural options - Periodic beach nourishment - DELFT HYDRAULICS and RIJKSWATERSTAAT (1987); DAVI- SON et al. (1992); STAUBLE and KRAUS (1993); HAMM et al. (1999)

- Dune restoration and creation - DOODY (1985); VELLINGA (1986); NORDSTROM and ARENS (1998); NORDSTROM et al. (1998)

- Wetland restoration and creation - NRC (1992, 1994); BOESCH et al. (1994); TRI et al. (1998) * Indigenous options - Afforestation

- Coconut leaf walls - Coconut fiber stone units - MCLEAN et al. (1998); MIMURA and NUNN (1998) - Wooden walls - Stone walls

(Managed) Retreat

* Increasing or establishing set- - Limited technology required - NRC (1990); KAY (1990); OWENS and COPE (1992); CATON back zones and ELIOT (1993); OTA (1993)

* Relocating threatened buildings - Various technologies - ROGERS (1993) * Phased-out or no development in - Limited technology required - OTA (1993); DETR (2000)

susceptible areas * Presumed mobility, rolling - Limited technology required - TITUS (1991, 1998)

easements * Managed realignment - Various technologies, depending - BURD (1995); ENGLISH NATURE (1997); FRENCH (1997,

on location 1999) * Creating upland buffers - Limited technology required - KALY and JONES (1998)

Accommodate * Emergency planning - Early-warning systems - PENNING-ROSWELL and FORDHAM (1994); HAQUE (1995,

1997); HANDMER (1997); ROSENTHAL and 'T HART (1998); ELLIOTT and STEWART (2000)

- Evacuation systems - PARKER and HANDMER (1997); ROSENTHAL and 'T HART (1998)

* Hazard insurance - Limited technology required - DAVISON (1993); OTA (1993); CRICHTON and MOUNSY (1997); CLARK (1998)

* Modification of land use and ag- - Various technologies (e.g., aquacul- ricultural practice ture, saline-resistant crops), depend-

ing on location and purpose * Modification of building styles - Various technologies - FEMA (1986, 1994, 1997)

and codes * Strict regulation of hazard zones - Limited technology required - MAY et al. (1996) * Improved drainage - Increased diameter of pipes - TITUS et al. (1987)

- Increased pump capacity - TITUS et al. (1987) * Desalination - Desalination plants - RIBEIRO (1996)

nology implementation, application, maintenance and en- forcement.

In some settings, however, public involvement can be dif- ficult to accomplish. In situations where there is little truly private land, coastal inhabitants may have little long-term stake and therefore interest in the land they occupy (e.g., in parts of Tonga; NUNN and WADDELL, 1992). Further, governments may have neither the resources to address country- wide coastal management (particularly in archipelagic nations) nor, compared to long-resident inhabitants, the local knowledge or experience that are essential for effective management (e.g., in parts of Fiji; NUNN et al., 1994a).

Implementation

Once all options for coastal adaptation have been considered and the most appropriate strategy has been selected and designed, implementation is the next stage. As indicated in Section 1, an adaptation strategy to sea-level rise can comprise one or more options that fall under the three broad cat- egories protect, retreat and accommodate. Table 2 provides an overview of these options and the technologies that make them possible. It should be noted that, in addition to the sub- division between protect, retreat and accommodate, there are various other ways to classify or distinguish between differ-




538 Klein et al.

ent adaptation strategies, both in generic terms (e.g., SMIT, 1993; BURTON, 1997; KLEIN and TOL, 1997; SMIT et al., 2000) and for coastal zones (e.g., KAY et al., 1996; POPE, 1997).

Adaptation can be either reactive or anticipatory, depending on the timing, goal and motive of its implementation. Re- active adaptation occurs after the initial impacts of climate change have become manifest, while anticipatory (or proactive) adaptation takes place before impacts are apparent. Sec- ond, as already discussed, adaptation may be considered to be autonomous or planned. Autonomous adaptation is spon- taneous, while planned adaptation (as shown in Figure 1) requires informed and strategic actions. KLEIN and NICH- OLLS (1998) concluded that most of the options listed in Table 2 require strategic planning, while few will occur autono- mously. Further, options to protect against sea-level rise can be implemented both reactively and proactively, while most retreat and accommodation options are best implemented in an anticipatory manner. FISCHER (1985) distinguished between preemptive, prescriptive, preventive and promotive coastal management, whereby only promotive management seeks the integration of management issues, such as impacts of climate change with coastal development pressures.

To date, the assessment of possible response strategies has mainly focused on protection. BIJLSMA et al. (1996) noted the need to identify and evaluate the full range of options listed in Table 2. The range of appropriate options will vary among and within countries, and different socio-economic sectors may prefer competing adaptation options for the same area. The existence of such a broad range of options is one of the reasons why adaptation to climate change is recommended to take place within the framework of integrated coastal zone management (see Section 2.2).

Monitoring and Evaluation

It is recommended practice in any field of policy that the performance of implemented measures is periodically or con- tinuously evaluated against the original objectives (although regrettably, this stage is often ignored or underplayed in practice). Such evaluation can yield new insights and information, which could give rise to adjust the strategy as appropriate (NRC, 1995). This process is illustrated in Figure 1 by the feedback loop from evaluation within the shaded box. This post-implementation evaluation must be distinguished from the evaluation exercise that is done to identify the most appropriate technology. The latter can be considered pre-implementation evaluation and is part of the planning and design phase (see Section 5.2).

Effective evaluation requires a reliable set of data or indicators, to be collected at some regular interval by means of an appropriate monitoring system. Indicators are a tool for reporting and communicating with decision-makers and the general public. They should fulfill a range of properties, including (i) a relationship to functional concepts, (ii) be rep- resentative and responsive to relevant changes in conditions, and (iii) be easily integrated within a broader evaluation framework. Evaluation is an ongoing process and the monitoring should be planned accordingly. There is limited experience of such long-term monitoring, so in many situations it

is unclear which are the most appropriate data or indicators (see also BASHER, 1999). For physical systems, experience can be drawn from countries where the coast has been mon- itored for long periods. In The Netherlands, for instance, the position of high water has been collected annually for nearly a century and cross-shore profiles have been measured annually since 1963 (VERHAGEN, 1989; WIJNBERG and TER-

WINDT, 1995). Observations of the "natural" evolution of the coast allow trends to be reliably estimated and hence the impact of human interventions on the coast (breakwaters, nourishment, etc.) to be evaluated.

In general, the technologies to be used for monitoring are the same as those used for initial description of the coastal system. They are therefore listed in the upper part of Table 1 and discussed by MORANG et al. (1997a), LARSON et al. (1997), MORANG et al. (1997b) and GORMAN et al. (1998). As the monitoring data build up, so the strengths and weak- nesses of the chosen policies become increasingly apparent.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Ever since humans have lived near the sea, they have increasingly developed and applied technologies to reduce their vulnerability to coastal hazards. The same technologies can be applied to adapt to anticipated impacts of climate change. The above sections show that many technologies are available to develop information and awareness for adaptation in coastal zones, to plan and design adaptation strategies, to implement them, and to monitor and evaluate their performance. However, many of the world's vulnerable coastal countries currently do not have access to these technologies, nor to the knowledge that is required to develop or implement them. Effective coastal adaptation by these countries could therefore benefit from increasing current efforts of technology transfer (KLEIN et al. 2000).

In spite of this paper's focus on technological options to adapt to climate change, it should be stressed that technology by itself is not a panacea. The effectiveness of coastal adaptation technologies depends strongly on the economic, institutional, legal and socio-cultural contexts in which they are implemented. Therefore, coastal adaptation technologies are most effective as part of a broader, integrated coastal management framework that recognizes immediate as well as longer-term sectoral needs. "Win-win" situations could be established when coastal adaptation technologies also provide benefits unrelated to climate change. Thus, technology can make an important contribution towards the sustainable development of coastal zones, provided they are implemented in an enabling economic, institutional, legal and socio-cultural environment.

Furthermore, climate change is but one of many interact- ing stresses in coastal zones. The importance of controlling non-climate stresses in the quest to reduce vulnerability to climate change must not be underestimated. Reducing maladaptation and increasing resilience will increase the ability of natural and human coastal systems to deal with and re- cover from perturbations and thus reduce vulnerability to impacts of climate change.

CAMPBELL and DE WET (2000) propose three strategies to





facilitate the inclusion of adaptation technologies into development programs:

* to incorporate considerations of climate change and sea- level rise into new development proposals;

* to develop proposals that are specifically aimed at address- ing the possible effects of climate change and sea-level rise;

* to develop proposals for strengthening institutional and technical capacity to facilitate the above two strategies and manage the effects of climate change and sea-level rise.

These strategies require an understanding of the potential effects of climate change on coastal zones and an iterative consultative process, involving all stakeholders, to ensure that all relevant interests are considered (see, for example, FISCHER, 1986, 1990).

An important barrier to the identification and use of appropriate coastal adaptation technologies is that empirical information on coastal adaptation to climate change is still scarce, so uncertainty about the appropriateness and generic applicability of adaptation technologies remains considerable. Continued impact and adaptation assessment, combined with fundamental research on coastal system response and economic, institutional, legal and socio-cultural aspects of adaptation, is required to understand which adaptation technologies might be most appropriate and most effectively transferred to similar coastal settings.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This paper is based on the chapter "Coastal Adaptation" of the IPCC Special Report on Methodological and Technologi- cal Issues in Technology Transfer (KLEIN et al., 2000). This chapter has greatly benefited from comments, suggestions, text inputs and encouragement provided by contributors, re- viewers and other lead authors, and their efforts also have been helpful in the preparation of this paper. The authors wish to thank N. Sundararaman, Secretary of IPCC, for his permission to submit this paper to Journal of Coastal Re- search.

LITERATURE CITED

ARNELL, N., 2000. Flood insurance. In: PARKER, D.J. (ed.), Floods. Volume 1, Routledge, London, UK, pp. 412-424.

BAKER, T.F., 1993. Absolute sea level measurements, climate change and vertical crustal movements. Global and Planetary Change, 8(3), 149-159.

BASHER, R.E., 1999. Data requirements for developing adaptations to climate variability and change. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 4(3-4), 39-49.

BEETS, D.J.; VAN DER VALK, L., and STIVE, M.J.F., 1992. Holocene evolution of the coast of Holland. Marine Geology, 103(1-3), 423- 443.

BIJLSMA, L.; EHLER, C.N.; KLEIN, R.J.T.; KULSHRESTHA, S.M.; MC- LEAN, R.F.; MIMURA, N.; NICHOLLS, R.J.; NURSE, L.A.; PEREZ NIETO, H.; STAKHIV, E.Z.; TURNER, R.K., and WARRICK, R.A., 1996. Coastal zones and small islands. In: WATSON, R.T.; ZINYOW- ERA, M.C., and Moss, R.H. (eds.), Climate Change 1995--Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Analyses. Contribution of Working Group II to the Second Assess- ment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 289-324.

BIRKEMEIER, W.A.; MILLER, H.C.; WILHELM, S.D.; DEWALL, A.E., and GoRBICS, C.S., 1985. A User's Guide to the Coastal Engineer-

ing Research Center's (CERC's) Field Research Facility. Instruction report CERC-85-1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Ex- periment Station, Vicksburgh, MI, 121p.

BIRKEMEIER, W.A.; NICHOLLS, R.J., and LEE, G.-H., 1999. Storm groups and morphologic change in the nearshore. In: KRAUS, C.N. and McDOUGAL, G.W. (eds.), Coastal Sediments '99. Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Coastal Engineering and Science of Coastal Sediment Processes, Hauppauge, Long Island, NY, 21-23 June 1999, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, pp. 1109-1122.

BOESCH, D.F.; JOSSELYN, M.N.; MEHTA, A.J.; MORRIS, J.T.; NUT- TLE, W.K.; SIMENSTAD, C.A., and SWIFT, D.J.P., 1994. Scientific assessment of coastal wetland loss, restoration and management in Louisiana. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 20, v+ 103p.

BURD, F., 1995. Managed Retreat--A Practical Guide. English Na- ture, Peterborough, UK, 27p.

BURROUGH, P.A. and McDONNELL, R.A., 1998. Principles of Geo- graphical Information Systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 333p.

BURTON, I., 1996. The growth of adaptation capacity: practice and policy. In: SMITH, J.B.; BHATTI, N.; MENZHULIN, G.V.; BENIOFF, R.; CAMPOS, M.; JALLOW, B.; RIJSBERMAN, F.; BUDYKO, M.I., and DIXON, R.K. (eds.), Adapting to Climate Change: An International Perspective. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, pp. 55-67.

BURTON, I., 1997. Vulnerability and adaptive response in the context of climate and climate change. Climatic Change, 36(1-2), 185-196.

CAMPBELL, J. and DE WET, N., 2000: Climate Change Adaptation: Incorporating Climate Change Adaptation into Development Activ- ities in Pacific Island Countries--A Set of Guidelines for Policy Makers and Development Planners. South Pacific Regional Envi- ronment Programme and International Global Change Institute, University of Waikato, Waikato, New Zealand, v+16p + apps.

CAPOBIANCO, M., 1999. Role and Use of Technologies in Relation to Integrated Coastal Zone Management. Report to the European Union Demonstration Programme on Integrated Coastal Zone Management, Tecnomare S.p.A., Venice, Italy, x+106p + apps.

CAPOBIANCO, M.; DE VRIEND, H.J.; NICHOLLS, R.J., and STIVE, M.J.F., 1999. Coastal area impact and vulnerability assessment: the point of view of a morphodynamic modeller. Journal of Coastal Research, 15(3), 701-716.

CAPOBIANCO, M. and STIVE, M.J.F., 1997. Soft protection technologies as a tool for integrated coastal zone management. In: OZHAN, E. (ed.), MEDCOAST '97. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, Valletta, Malta, 11-14 November 1997, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, pp. 469-484.

CAPOBIANCO, M.; STIVE, M.J.F.; JIMENEZ, J.A., and SANCHEZ-AR- CILLA, A., 1998. Towards the definition of budget models for the evolution of deltas. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 4(1), 7-16.

CARTER, R.W.G., 1988. Coastal Environments-An Introduction to the Physical, Ecological and Cultural Systems of Coastlines. Aca- demic Press, London, UK, xv+617p.

CARTER, T.R.; PARRY, M.L.; NISHIOKA, S., and HARASAWA, H. (eds.), 1994. Technical Guidelines for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations. Report of Working Group II of the Intergovern- mental Panel on Climate Change, University College London and Centre for Global Environmental Research, London, UK, and Tsu- kuba, Japan, x+59p.

CATON, B. and ELIOT, I., 1993. Coastal hazard policy development and the Australian federal system. In: McLEAN, R.F. and MIMU- RA, N. (eds.), Vulnerability Assessment to Sea-Level Rise and Coast- al Zone Management. Proceedings of the IPCC/WCC'93 Eastern Hemisphere Workshop, Tsukuba, Japan, 3-6 August 1993, De- partment of Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra, Aus- tralia, pp. 417-427.

CAZENAVE, A.; DOMINH, K.; GENNERO, M.C., and FERRET, B., 1998. Global mean sea level changes observed by TOPEX-POSEIDON and ERS-1. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 23(9-10), 1069- 1075.

CEC (Commission of the European Communities), 1999. Towards a European Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) Strategy:




540 Klein et al.

General Principles and Policy Options--A Reflection Paper. Direc- torates-General Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protec- tion, Fisheries and Regional Policies and Cohesion, Office for Of- ficial Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, 31p. + maps.

CHAO, P.T. and HOBBS, B.F., 1997. Decision analysis of shoreline protection under climate change uncertainty. Water Resources Re- search, 33(4), 817-829.

CICIN-SAIN, B., 1993. Sustainable development and integrated coastal management. Ocean & Coastal Management, 21(1-3), 11- 43.

CICIN-SAIN, B. and KNECHT, R.W., 1998. Integrated Coastal and Ocean Management: Concepts and Practices. Island Press, Wash- ington, DC, 499p.

CLARK, C.D.; RIPLEY, H.T.; GREEN, E.P.; EDWARDS, A.J., and MUM- BY, P.J., 1997. Mapping and measurement of tropical coastal environments with hyperspectral and high spatial resolution data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 18(2), 237-242.

CLARK, M., 1998. Flood insurance as a management strategy for UK coastal resilience. The Geographical Journal, 164(3), 333-343.

COHEN, J.E.; SMALL, C.; MELLINGER, A.; GALLUP, J., and SACHS,

J., 1997. Estimates of coastal populations. Science, 278, 1211- 1212.

CRICHTON, D. and MOUNSEY, C. 1997. How the insurance market will use its flood research. Proceedings of the 32nd MAFF Confer- ence on Coastal and River Engineering, Keele, UK, 2-4 July 1997, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, London, UK, pp. J31- J34.

CROWELL, M.; LEATHERMAN, S.P., and BUCKLEY, M.K., 1991. His- torical shoreline change: error analysis and mapping accuracy. Journal of Coastal Research, 7(3), 839-852.

CROWELL, M.; LEATHERMAN, S.P., and BUCKLEY, M.K., 1993. Ero- sion rate analysis: long-term versus short-term data. Shore and Beach, 61(1), 13-20.

DAVISON, A.T., 1993. The national flood insurance program and coastal hazards. In: MAGOON, O.T.; WILSON, W.S.; CONVERSE, H., and TOBIN, L.T. (eds.), Coastal Zone '93. Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management, New Orleans, LA, 19-23 July 1993, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, pp. 1377-1391.

DAVISON, A.T.; NICHOLLS, R.J., and LEATHERMAN, S.P., 1992. Beach nourishment as a coastal management tool: an annotated bibliography on developments associated with the artificial nourishment of beaches. Journal of Coastal Research, 8(4), 984-1022.

DEBUSSCHERE, K.; PENLAND, S.; WESTPHAL, K.A.; REIMER, P.D., and MCBRIDE, R.A., 1991. Aerial videotape mapping of coastal geomorphic changes. In: MAGOON, O.T.; CONVERSE, H.; TIPPIE, V.; TOBIN, L.T., and CLARK, D. (eds.), Coastal Zone '91. Proceed- ings of the 7th Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management, Long Beach, CA, 8-12 July 1991, American Society of Civil En- gineers, New York, NY, pp. 370-390.

DELFT HYDRAULICS AND RIJKSWATERSTAAT, 1987. Manual on Ar- tificial Beach Nourishment. CUR Report No. 130, Centre for Civil Engineering Research, Codes and Specifications, Gouda, The Netherlands, 195p.

DETR (Department of the Environment, Transport and the Re- gions), 2000. Planning Policy Guidance: Development and Flood Risk. Consultation paper, Department of the Environment, Trans- port and the Regions, London, UK, 51p.

DE VRIEND, H.J., 1998. Prediction of aggregated-scale coastal evolution. In: THORNTON, E.B. (ed.), Coastal Dynamics '97. Proceed- ings of the 3rd Coastal Dynamics Conference, Plymouth, UK, June 1997, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, pp. 644-653.

DE VRIEND, H.J.; CAPOBIANCO, M.; CHESHER, T.; DE SWART, H.E.; LATTEUX, B., and STIVE, M.J.F., 1993. Approaches to long-term modelling of coastal morphology: a review. Coastal Engineering, 21(1-3), 225-269.

DOODY, P. (ed.), 1985. Sand Dunes and their Management. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, UK, 262p.

DOUGLAS, B.C., 1991. Global sea-level rise. Journal of Geophysical Research-Oceans, 96(C4), 6981-6992.

EHLER, C.N.; CICIN-SAIN, B.; KNECHT, R.; SOUTH, R., and WEIHER, R., 1997. Guidelines to assist policy makers and managers of coastal areas in the integration of coastal management programs and national climate-change action plans. Ocean & Coastal Man- agement, 37(1), 7-27.

ELLIOTT, J.F. and STEWART, B.J., 2000. Early warning for flood hazards: lessons learned. In: PARKER, D.J. (ed.), Floods. Volume 1, Routledge, London, UK, pp. 4391-4399.

EMERY, K.O. and AUBREY, D.G., 1991. Sea Levels, Land Levels, and Tide Gauges. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, xiv+237p.

ENGELEN, G.; WHITE, R., and ULJEE, I., 1993. Exploratory model-

ling of socio-economic impacts of climate change. In: MAUL, G.A. (ed.), Climatic Change in the Intra-Americas Sea-Implications of Future Climate on the Ecosystems and Socio-Economic Structure in the Marine and Coastal Regions of the Caribbean Sea, Gulf of Mexico, Bahamas, and the Northeast Coast of South America. Ed- ward Arnold, London, UK, pp. 350-368.

ENGLISH NATURE, 1993. Estuary Management Plans: A Co-Ordi- nators Guide. English Nature, Peterborough, UK, 88p.

ENGLISH NATURE, 1997. Coastal Zone Conservation. English Nature, Peterborough, UK, 20p.

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), 1986. Coastal Construction Manual. FEMA-55, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, xxi+ 114p + apps.

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), 1994. Mitigation of Flood and Erosion Damage to Residential Buildings in Coastal Areas. FEMA-257, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, ii+34p.

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), 1997. Building Performance Assessment: Hurricane Fran in North Carolina-Ob- servations, Recommendations and Technical Guidance. FEMA-290, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, viii+60p + apps.

FISCHER, D.W., 1985. Responses to coastal threats: toward an integrated strategy. Journal of Coastal Research, 1(4), 383-388.

FISCHER, D.W., 1986. Beach erosion control: public issues in beach stabilization decisions, Florida. Journal of Coastal Research, 2(1), 51-59.

FISCHER, D.W., 1990. Public policy aspects of beach erosion control: the public interest requires that all relevant interests have access to decision-making. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 49(2), 185-197.

FORBES, D.L. and HosoI, Y., 1995. Coastal Erosion in South Tarawa, Kiribati. Technical Report No. 225, South Pacific Applied Geosci- ence Commission, Suva, Fiji, 77p + apps.

FRENCH, P.W., 1997. Coastal and Estuarine Management. Routled- ge, London, UK, xv+251p.

FRENCH, P.W., 1999. Managed retreat: a natural analogue from the Medway estuary, UK. Ocean & Coastal Management, 42(1), 49- 62.

Fu, L.-L.; KOBLINSKY, C.J.; MINSTER, J.-F., and PICAUT, J., 1996. Reflecting on the first three years of TOPEX/POSEIDON. Eos Transactions, 77(12), 109, 111, 117.

GILBERT, S. and HORNER, R., 1984. The Thames Barrier. Thomas

Telford, London, UK, 182p. GOLDBERG, E.D., 1994. Coastal Zone Space-Prelude to Conflict?

IOC Ocean Forum I, UNESCO Publishing, Paris, France, 138p. GOMMES, R.; Du GUERNY, J.; NACHTERGAELE, F., and BRINKMAN,

R., 1998. Potential Impacts of Sea-Level Rise on Populations and Agriculture. FAO SD-Dimensions Special, http://www.fao.org/sd/ eidirect/EIre0045.htm.

GORMAN, L.; MORANG, A., and LARSON, R., 1998. Monitoring the coastal environment; part IV: mapping, shoreline changes, and bathymetric analysis. Journal of Coastal Research, 14(1), 61-92.

GORNITZ, V.M.; DANIELS, R.C.; WHITE, T.W., and BIRDWELL, K.R., 1994. The development of a coastal risk database: vulnerability to sea-level rise in the U.S. Southeast. Journal of Coastal Research, special issue 12, 327-338.

GROGER, M. and PLAG, H.-P., 1993. Estimations of a global sea level trend: limitations from the structure of the PSMSL global sea level data set. Global and Planetary Change, 8(3), 161-179.

HAMM, L.; HANSON, H.; CAPOBIANCO, M.; DETTE, H.H.; LECHUGA,





A., and SPANHOFF, R., 1999. Beach fills in Europe-projects, prac- tises and objectives. In: EDGE, B. (ed.), Coastal Engineering 1998. Proceedings of the 26th International Coastal Engineering Con- ference, Copenhagen, Denmark, 22-26 June 1998, American So- ciety of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, pp. 3060-3073.

HANDMER, J. (ed.), 1997. Flood Warning: Issues and Practice in Total System Design. Flood Hazard Research Centre, Middlesex Univer- sity, London, UK, 199p.

HAQUE, C.E., 1995. Climatic hazards warning process in Bangla- desh: experience of, and lessons from, the 1991 April cyclone. En- vironmental Management, 19(5), 719-734.

HAQUE, C.E., 1997. Atmospheric hazards preparedness in Bangla- desh-a study of warning, adjustments and recovery from the April 1991 cyclone. Natural Hazards, 16(2-3), 181-202.

HARVEY, N.; CLOUSTON, B., and CARVALHO, P., 1999. Improving coastal vulnerability assessment methodologies for integrated coastal zone management: an approach from south Australia. Aus- tralian Geographical Studies, 37(1), 50-69.

HENDERSON, F.M.; HART, JR., T.F.; HEATON, B.P., and PORTOLESE, J.E., 1999. Mapping coastal ecosystems over a steep development gradient using C-CAP protocols. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 20(4), 727-744.

HOLMAN, R.A.; SALLENGER, JR., A.H.; LIPPMANN, T.C., and HAINES, J.W., 1994. The application of video image processing to the study of nearshore processes. Oceanography, 6(3), 78-85.

HUGHES, P. and BRUNDRIT, G.B., 1992. An index to assess South Africa's vulnerability to sea-level rise. South African Journal of Science, 88(6), 308-311.

HUMPHREY, S. and BURBRIDGE, P., 1999. Planning and Manage- ment Processes: Sectoral and Territorial Cooperation. Report to the European Union Demonstration Programme on Integrated Coast- al Zone Management, Department of Marine Sciences and Coastal Management, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, xi+65p + apps.

IPCC CZMS, 1990. Strategies for Adaptation to Sea Level Rise. Report of the Coastal Zone Management Subgroup, Response Strategies Working Group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Manage- ment, The Hague, The Netherlands, x+122p.

IPCC CZMS, 1992. A common methodology for assessing vulnerability to sea-level rise-second revision. Global Climate Change and the Rising Challenge of the Sea. Report of the Coastal Zone Management Subgroup, Response Strategies Working Group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, The Hague, The Netherlands, Appendix C, 27p.

KALY, U.L. and JONES, G.P., 1998. Mangrove restoration: a potential tool for coastal management in tropical developing countries. Am- bio, 27(8), 656-661.

KAY, R.C., 1990. Development controls on eroding coastlines-reducing the future impact of greenhouse-induced sea level rise. Land Use Policy, 7(4), 169-172.

KAY, R.C. and HAY, J.E., 1993. A decision support approach to coastal vulnerability and resilience assessment: a tool for integrated coastal zone management. In: MCLEAN, R.F. and MIMURA, N. (eds.), Vulnerability Assessment to Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Zone Management. Proceedings of the IPCC/WCC'93 Eastern Hemi- sphere Workshop, Tsukuba, Japan, 3-6 August 1993, Department of Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra, Australia, pp. 213-225.

KAY, R.C.; KIRKLAND, A., and STEWART, I., 1996. Planning for future climate change and sea-level rise induced coastal change in Australia and New Zealand. In: BOUMA, W.J.; PEARMAN, G.I., and MANNING, M.R. (eds.), Greenhouse-Coping with Climate Change. CSIRO Publishing, Wellington, New Zealand, pp. 377-398.

KELLY, M.P., 1991. Global warming: implications for the Thames Barrier and associated defences. In: FRASSETTO, R. (ed.), Impact of Sea Level Rise on Cities and Regions. Proceedings of the 1st International Meeting "Cities on Water", Venice, Italy, 11-13 De- cember 1989, Marsilio Editori, Venice, Italy, pp. 93-98.

KING, G., 1999. Participation in the ICZM Processes: Mechanisms and Procedures Needed. Report to the European Union Demon-

stration Programme on Integrated Coastal Zone Management, Hy- der Consulting, Swansea, UK, vi+ l14p.

KLEIN, R.J.T.; BUCKLEY, E.N.; ASTON, J.; NICHOLLS, R.J.; RAGOON- ADEN, S.; CAPOBIANCO, M.; MIZUTANI, N., and NUNN, P.D., 2000. Coastal adaptation. In: METZ, B.; DAVIDSON, O.R.; MARTENS, J.W.; VAN ROOIJEN, S.N.M., and VAN WIE MCGRORY, L.L. (eds.), Methodological and Technological Issues in Technology Transfer. Special Report of Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Pan- el on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 349-372.

KLEIN, R.J.T. and NICHOLLS, R.J., 1998. Coastal zones. In: FEEN- STRA, J.F.; BURTON, I.; SMITH, J.B., and TOL, R.S.J. (eds.), Hand- book on Methods for Climate Change Impact Assessment and Ad- aptation Strategies. Version 2.0, United Nations Environment Pro- gramme and Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Univer- siteit, Nairobi, Kenya, and Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 7.1- 7.35.

KLEIN, R.J.T. and NICHOLLS, R.J., 1999. Assessment of coastal vulnerability to climate change. Ambio, 28(2), 182-187.

KLEIN, R.J.T.; NICHOLLS, R.J., and MIMURA, N., 1999. Coastal adaptation to climate change: can the IPCC Technical Guidelines be applied? Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 4(3-4), 51-64.

KLEIN, R.J.T. and TOL, R.S.J., 1997. Adaptation to Climate Change: Options and Technologies-An Overview Paper. Technical Paper FCCC/TP/1997/3, United Nations Framework Convention on Cli- mate Change Secretariat, Bonn, Germany, iii+33p.

LARSON, R.; MORANG, A., and GORMAN, L., 1997. Monitoring the coastal environment; part II: sediment sampling and geotechnical methods. Journal of Coastal Research, 13(2), 308-330.

LEAFE, R.; PETHICK, J., and TOWNEND, I., 1998. Realizing the benefits of shoreline management. The Geographical Journal, 164(3), 282-290.

LEATHERMAN, S.P.; NICHOLLS, R.J., and DENNIS, K.C., 1995. Aerial videotape-assisted vulnerability analysis: a cost-effective approach to assess sea-level rise impacts. Journal of Coastal Research, special issue 14, 15-25.

LEU, L.-G.; Kuo, Y.-Y., and LIU, C.-T., 1999. Coastal bathymetry from the wave spectrum of SPOT images. Coastal Engineering Journal, 41(1), 21-41.

LILLYCROP, W.J. and ESTEP, L.L., 1995. Generational advancements in coastal surveying, mapping. Sea Technology, 36(6), 10-16.

LIPTON, D.W. and WELLMAN, K., 1995. Economic Valuation of Nat- ural Resources-A Handbook for Coastal Resource Policymakers. NOAA Coastal Ocean Program Decision Analysis Series No. 5, NOAA Coastal Ocean Office, Silver Spring, MD, viii + 131p.

LONGLEY, P.; GOODCHILD, M.; MAGUIRE, D., and RHIND, D. (eds.), 1999. Geographical Information Systems: Principles, Techniques, Applications and Management. Second edition, Wiley, London, UK, 2 volumes.

MARTINEZ-DIAZ-DE-LEON, A.; ROBINSON, I.S.; BALLESTERO, D., and COEN, E., 1999. Wind driven ocean circulation features in the Gulf of Tehuantepec, Mexico, revealed by combined SAR and SST satellite sensor data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 20(8), 1661-1668.

MAY, P.; BURBY, R.J.; ERICKSEN, N.J.; HANDMER, J.W.; DIXON, J.E.; MICHAELS, S., and SMITH, D.I., 1996. Environmental Management and Governance: Intergovernmental Approaches to Hazards and Sustainability. Routledge, London, UK, xvii+254p.

McLEAN, R.; ROSE, L.; KALUWIN, C., and ASTON, J. (eds.), 1998. The Australia ISPREP Coastal Vulnerability Initiative for Atoll States. Workshop Report, Tarawa, Kiribati, 10-13 February 1997, Envi- ronment Australia, Canberra, Australia. 26p.

MILLER, L.; CHENEY, R., and LILLIBRIDGE, J., 1993. Blending ERS- 1 altimetry and tide-gauge data. Eos Transactions, 74(16), 185, 197.

MIMURA, N. and NUNN, P.D., 1998. Trends of beach erosion and shoreline protection in rural Fiji. Journal of Coastal Research, 14(1), 37-46.

MOORE, L.J., 2000. Shoreline mapping techniques. Journal of Coast- al Research, 16(1), 111-124.

MORANG, A.; LARSON, R., and GORMAN, L., 1997a. Monitoring the




542 Klein et al.

coastal environment; part I: waves and currents. Journal of Coast- al Research, 13(1), 111-133.

MORANG, A.; LARSON, R., and GORMAN, L., 1997b. Monitoring the coastal environment; part III: geophysical and research methods. Journal of Coastal Research, 13(4), 1064-1085.

NEILAN, R.E.; VAN ScoY, P.A., and WOODWORTH, P.L. (eds.), 1997. Workshop on Methods for Monitoring Sea Level-GPS and Tide Gauge Benchmark Monitoring and GPS Altimeter Calibration. Pro- ceedings of an IGS/PSMSL workshop, Pasadena, CA, 17-18 March 1997, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technol- ogy, Pasadena, CA, xvii+202p.

NEREM, R.S., 1995. Global mean sea level variation from TOPEX/ POSEIDON altimeter data. Science, 268, 708-710.

NEREM, R.S.; HAINES, B.J.; HENDRICKS, J.; MINSTER, J.F.; MIT- CHUM, G.T., and WHITE, W.B., 1997. Improved determination of global mean sea level variations using TOPEX/POSEIDON altimeter data. Geophysical Research Letters, 24(11), 1331-1334.

NICHOLLS, R.J., 1995. Coastal megacities and climate change. GeoJournal, 37(3), 369-379.

NICHOLLS, R.J. and BRANSON, J. (eds.), 1998. Enhancing coastal resilience-planning for an uncertain future. The Geographical Jour- nal, 164(3), 255-343.

NICHOLLS, R.J.; HOOZEMANS, F.M.J., and MARCHAND, M., 1999: In- creasing flood risk and wetland losses due to global sea-level rise: regional and global analyses-the science of climate change. Glob- al Environmental Change, 9, S69-S87.

NICHOLLS, R.J. and LEATHERMAN, S.P. (eds.), 1995. The potential impact of accelerated sea-level rise on developing countries. Jour- nal of Coastal Research, special issue 14, 1-324.

NICHOLLS, R.J. and LEATHERMAN, S.P., 1996. Adapting to sea-level rise: relative sea-level trends to 2100 for the United States. Coast- al Management, 24(4), 301-324.

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), 1998. International Sea Level Workshop. Workshop Report, Honolulu, HI, 10-11 June 1997, Global Climate Observing System Publ. No. 43, Global Ocean Observing System Publ. No. 55, International CLI- VAR Project Office Publ. No. 16, Silver Spring, MD, iv+133p.

NORDSTROM, K.F. and ARENS, S.M., 1998. The role of human actions in evolution and management of foredunes in The Netherlands and New Jersey. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 4, 169-180.

NORDSTROM, K.F.; LAMPE, R., and VANDEMARK, L.M., 1998. Rees- tablishing naturally functioning dunes on developed coasts. En- vironmental Management, 25(1), 37-51.

NRC (National Research Council), 1990. Managing Coastal Erosion. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 522p.

NRC (National Research Council), 1992. Restoration of Aquatic Eco- systems. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 522p.

NRC (National Research Council), 1994. Restoring and Protecting Marine Habitat: The Role of Engineering and Technology. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 193p.

NRC (National Research Council), 1995. Science, Policy and the Coast: Improving Decisionmaking. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 85p.

NUNN, P.D.; RAVUVU, A.D.; AALBERSBERG, W.; MIMURA, N., and YAMADA, K., 1994a. Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability and Re- silience to Sea-Level Rise and Climate Change, Case Study: Yasawa Islands, Fiji-Phase II: Development of Methodology. Environment Agency Japan, Overseas Environment Cooperation Centre Japan, South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, xiv+ll8p.

NUNN, P.D.; RAVUVU, A.D.; BALOGH, E.; MIMURA, N., and YAMADA, K., 1994b. Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability and Resilience to Sea-Level Rise and Climate Change, Case Study: Savai'i Island, Western Samoa-Phase II: Development of Methodology. Environ- ment Agency Japan, Overseas Environment Cooperation Centre Japan, South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, xiv+ 109p.

NUNN, P.D. and WADDELL, E., 1992. Implications of Climate Change and Sea-Level Rise for the Kingdom of Tonga. South Pacific Re- gional Environment Programme Reports and Studies No. 58, Apia, Samoa, 39p.

O'REGAN, P.R., 1996. The use of contemporary information technol-

ogies for coastal research and management-a review. Journal of Coastal Research, 12(1), 192-204.

OTA (Office of Technology Assessment), 1993. Preparing for an Un- certain Climate. Volume 1, U.S. Congress Publ. No. OTA-0-567, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 359p.

OWENS, S.E. and COPE, D.R., 1992. Land Use Planning Policy and Climate Change. Department of the Environment, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, UK, x +109p.

PARKER, D.J. and HANDMER, J.W., 1997. The role of unofficial flood warning systems. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Manage- ment, 6(1), 45-60.

PARRY, M.; ARNELL, N.; HULME, M.; NICHOLLS, R., and LIVERMORE, M., 1998. Adapting to the inevitable. Nature, 395, 741.

PENNING-ROWSELL, E.C. and FORDHAM, M. (eds.), 1994. Floods across Europe-Flood Hazard Assessment, Modelling and Man- agement. Middlesex University Press, London, UK, xviii+214p.

PENNING-ROWSELL, E.C.; GREEN, C.H.; THOMPSON, P.M.; COKER, A.M.; TUNSTALL, S.M.; RICHARDS, C., and PARKER, D.J., 1992. The Economics of Coastal Management-A Manual of Benefit As- sessment Techniques, Belhaven Press, London, UK, xviii+380p.

PENNING-ROWSELL, E.C.; WINCHESTER, P., and GARDINER, G., 1998. New approaches to sustainable hazard management for Venice. The Geographical Journal, 164(1), 1-18.

PIELKE, JR., R.A., 1998. Rethinking the role of adaptation in climate policy, Global Environmental Change, 8(2), 159-170.

PILARCZYK, K.W. (ed.), 1990. Coastal Protection. Proceedings of a short course on coastal protection, Delft, The Netherlands, 30 June-1 July 1990, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 500p.

PLANT, N.G. and HOLMAN, R.A., 1997. Intertidal beach profile es- timation using video images. Marine Geology, 140(1-2), 1-24.

PONTEE and TOWNEND, 1999. An estuary cause-consequence model. Proceedings of the 34th MAFF Conference on River and Coastal Engineering, Keele, UK, 30 June-2 July 1999, Ministry of Agri- culture, Fisheries and Food, London, UK, pp. 5.2.1-5.2.17.

POPE, J., 1997. Responding to coastal erosion and flooding damages. Journal of Coastal Research, 13(3), 704-710.

PUGH, D.T., 1987. Tides, Surges and Mean Sea-Level: A Handbook for Engineers and Scientists. Wiley, Chichester, UK, 472p.

RAPER, S.C.B.; WIGLEY, T.M.L., and WARRICK, R.A., 1996. Global sea level rise: past and future. In: MILLIMAN, J.D. and HAQ, B.U. (eds.), Sea Level Rise and Coastal Subsidence--Causes, Conse- quences, and Strategies. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 11-45.

REDFERN, H. and WILLIAMS, R.G., 1996. Remote sensing-latest developments and uses. Journal of the Institution of Water and En- vironmental Management, 10(6), 423-428.

RIBEIRO, J.F., 1996. Desalination Technology-Survey and Prospects. European Commission Joint Research Centre Publ. No. EUR 16434 EN, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Seville, Spain, vii+56p.

ROGERS, S.M., 1993. Relocating erosion-threatened buildings: a study of North Carolina housemoving. In: MAGOON, O.T.; WILSON,

W.S.; CONVERSE, H., and TOBIN, L.T. (eds.), Coastal Zone '93. Pro- ceedings of the 8th Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Manage- ment, New Orleans, LA, 19-23 July 1993, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, pp. 1392-1405.

ROSENTHAL, U. and 'T HART, P. (eds.), 1998. Flood Response and Crisis Management in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 236p.

RUTH, M. and PIEPER, F., 1994. Modeling spatial dynamics of sea- level rise in a coastal area. System Dynamics Review, 10(4), 375- 389.

SALLENGER, JR., A.H.; KRABILL, W.; BROCK, J.; SWIFT, R.; JANSEN, M.; MANIZADE, S.; RICHMOND, B.; HAMPTON, M., and ESLINGER, D., 1999. Airborne laser study quantifies El Nifio-induced coastal change. Eos Transactions, 80(8), 89, 92-93.

SHAW, J.; TAYLOR, R.B.; FORBES, D.L.; RUZ, M.-H., and SOLOMON, S., 1998. Sensitivity of the Coasts of Canada to Sea-Level Rise. Bul- letin 505, Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa, Canada, 79p.

SILVESTER, R. and Hsu, J.R.C., 1993. Coastal Stabilization-Inno- vative Concepts. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 578p.

SMIT, B. (ed.), 1993. Adaptation to Climatic Variability and Change.





Report of the Task Force on Climate Adaptation, Occasional Paper No. 19, University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada, viii+53p.

SMIT, B.; BURTON, I.; KLEIN, R.J.T., and WANDEL, J., 2000. The anatomy of adaptation to climate change and variability. Climatic Change, in press.

SORENSEN, R.M.; WEISMAN, R.N., and LENNON, G.P., 1984. Control of erosion, inundation and salinity intrusion caused by sea-level rise. In: BARTH, M.C. and TITUS, J.G. (eds.), Greenhouse Effect and Sea Level Rise. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY, pp. 179- 214.

STAUBLE, D.K. and GROSSKOPF, W.G., 1993. Monitoring project response to storms: Ocean City, Maryland beachfill. Shore and Beach, 61(1), 23-33.

STAUBLE, D.K. and KRAUS, N.C., 1993. Beach Nourishment Engi- neering and Management Considerations. American Society of Civ- il Engineers, New York, NY, 245p.

TAIEPA, T.; LYVER, P.; HORSLEY, P.; DAVIS, J.; BRAGG, M., and MOLLER, H., 1997. Co-management of New Zealand's conservation estate by Maori and Pakeha-a review. Environmental Conserva- tion, 24(3), 236-250.

TITUS, J.G., 1991. Greenhouse effect and coastal wetland policy: how Americans could abandon an area the size of Massachusetts at minimum cost. Environmental Management, 15(1), 39-58.

TITUS, J.G., 1998. Rising seas, coastal erosion and the takings clause: how to save wetlands and beaches without hurting prop- erty owners. Maryland Law Review, 57(4), 1279-1399.

TITUS, J.G.; Kuo, C.Y.; GIBBS, M.J.; LAROCHE, T.B.; WEBB, M.K., and WADDELL, J.O., 1987. Greenhouse effect, sea level rise and coastal drainage systems. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 113(2), 216-227.

TOL, R.S.J.; KLEIN, R.J.T.; JANSEN, H.M.A., and VERBRUGGEN, H., 1996. Some economic considerations on the importance of proactive integrated coastal zone management. Ocean & Coastal Man- agement, 32(1), 39-55.

TRI, N.H.; ADGER, W.N., and KELLY, P.M., 1998. Natural resource management in mitigating climate impacts: the example of mangrove restoration in Vietnam. Global Environmental Change, 8(1), 49-61.

TSYBAN, A.; EVERETT, J.T., and TITUS, J.G., 1990. World oceans and coastal zones. In: McG. TEGART, W.J.; SHELDON, G.W., and GRIF-

FITHS, D.C. (eds.), Climate Change-The IPCC Impacts Assess- ment. Contribution of Working Group II to the First Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Aus- tralian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, Australia, pp. 6.1-6.28.

TUNSTALL, S.M., 2000. Public perception of environmental changes to the Thames Estuary in London, UK. Journal of Coastal Re- search, 16(2), 269-277.

TUNSTALL, S.M. and PENNING-ROWSELL, E.C., 1998. The English beach: experiences and values. The Geographical Journal, 164(3), 319-332.

TURNER, R.K. and ADGER, W.N., 1996. Coastal Zone Resources As- sessment Guidelines. Land-Ocean Interactions in the Coastal Zone Reports and Studies No. 4, IGBP/LOICZ, Texel, The Netherlands, iv+ 101p.

TURNER, R.K.; SUBAK, S., and ADGER, W.N., 1996. Pressures, trends, and impacts in coastal zones: interactions between socio- economic and natural systems. Environmental Management, 20(2), 159-173.

UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), 1999. Coastal Adaptation Technologies. Technical Paper FCCC/TP/1999/1, United Nations Framework Convention on Cli- mate Change Secretariat, Bonn, Germany, 49p.

VAN DE PLASSCHE, 0. (ed.), 1986. Sea Level Research-A Manual for the Collection and Evaluation ofData. Geo Books, Norwich, UK, xxv+618p.

VELLINGA, P., 1986. Beach and Dune Erosion during Storm Surges. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Nether- lands, 169p.

VERHAGEN, H.J., 1989. Sand waves along the Dutch coast. Coastal Engineering, 13(2), 129-147.

VILES, H. and SPENCER, T., 1995. Coastal Problems-Geomorpholo- gy, Ecology and Society at the Coast. Edward Arnold, London, UK, x+350p.

WARRICK, R.A.; LE PROVOST, C.; MEIER, M.F.; OERLEMANS, J., and WOODWORTH, P.L., 1996. Changes in sea level. In: HOUGHTON,

J.T.; MEIRA FILHO, L.G.; CALLANDER, B.A.; HARRIS, N.; KATTEN-

BERG, A., and MASKELL, K. (eds.), Climate Change 1995-The Sci- ence of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group I to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Cli- mate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 359-405.

WATSON, R.T.; ZINYOWERA, M.C., and Moss, R.H. (eds.), 1998. The Regional Impacts of Climate Change-An Assessment of Vulnera- bility. Special Report of Working Group II of the Intergovernmen- tal Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, UK, x+517p.

WCC'93, 1994. Preparing to Meet the Coastal Challenges of the 21st Century. Report of the World Coast Conference, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 1-5 November 1993, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, The Hague, The Netherlands, 49p + apps.

WEST, J.J. and DOWLATABADI, H., 1999. On assessing the economic

impacts of sea-level rise on developed coasts. In: DOWNING, T.E.; OLSTHOORN, A.A., and TOL, R.S.J. (eds.), Climate, Change and Risk. Routledge, London, UK, pp. 205-220.

WIGLEY, T.M.L., 1995. Global-mean temperature and sea level consequences of greenhouse gas stabilization. Geophysical Research Letters, 22(1), 45-48.

WIJNBERG, K.M. and TERWINDT, J.H.J., 1995. Extracting decadal morphological behaviour from high-resolution, long-term bathymetric surveys along the Holland coast using eigenfunction analysis. Marine Geology, 126(1-4), 301-330.

WOODWORTH, P.L., 1991. The Permanent Service for Mean Sea Lev- el and the Global Sea Level Observing System. Journal of Coastal Research, 7(3), 699-710.

WRIGHT, D.J. and BARTLETT, D.J. (eds.), 1999. Marine and Coastal Geographical Information Systems. Taylor and Francis, London, UK, 348p.

YAMADA, K.; NUNN, P.D.; MIMURA, N.; MACHIDA, S., and YAMA- MOTO, M., 1995. Methodology for the assessment of vulnerability of South Pacific island countries to sea-level rise and climate change. Journal of Global Environment Engineering, 1(1), 101- 125.

YOHE, G.W. and NEUMANN, J., 1997. Planning for sea level rise and shore protection under climate uncertainty. Climatic Change, 37(1), 243-270.

ZERBINI, S.; PLAG, H.-P.; BAKER, T.; BECKER, M.; BILLIRIS, H.; BURKI, B.; KAHLE, H.-G.; MARSON, I.; PEZZOLI, L.; RICHTER, B.; ROMAGNOLI, C.; SZTOBRYN, M.; TOMASI, P.; TSIMPLIS, M.; VEIS, G., and VERRONE, G., 1996. Sea level in the Mediterranean: a first step towards separating crustal movements and absolute sea-level variations. Global and Planetary Change, 14(1-2), 1-48.

ZHANG, K.; DOUGLAS, B.C., and LEATHERMAN, S.P., 1997. East Coast storm surges provide unique climate record. Eos Transac- tions, 78, 389, 396-397.




Documents

Technological Options for Adaptation to Climate Change in Coastal Zones